Patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer typically have a poor prognosis, partly because the cancer usually causes no symptoms early on, leading to locally advanced or metastatic disease at time of diagnosis. Median survival from diagnosis is around 3 to 6 months; 5-year survival is less than 5%.[52] With 37,170 cases diagnosed in the United States in 2007, and 33,700 deaths, pancreatic cancer has one of the highest fatality rates of all cancers, and is the fourth-highest cancer killer in the United States among both men and women. Although it accounts for only 2.5% of new cases, pancreatic cancer is responsible for 6% of cancer deaths each year.[53]

Pancreatic cancer may occasionally result in diabetes. Insulin production is hampered, and it has been suggested the cancer can also prompt the onset of diabetes and vice versa.[54]

The Thrill Is GoneBy Rev SharkRealMoney.com Contributor2/17/2011 8:48 AM EST "It is not worthwhile to try to keep history from repeating itself, for man's character will always make the preventing of the repetitions impossible."

-- Mark Twain

There have been a lot of comparisons made lately between the current action and the Nasdaq bubble in late 1999 and early 2000. During that period, the Nasdaq was up about 88% as it moved from 2730 in October 1999 to a high of 5130 in March 2000. The current run isn't nearly as big, but it is still pretty impressive. The Nasdaq has moved from a low of 2099 in August 2010 to a high yesterday of 2828 for a gain of only 34.7%.

The biggest similarity between both periods is that both moves were practically straight up. Many market participants, however, including me, have commented lately about how the current action has a much different feel. I keep pondering whether the action really is that much different or is it the perception of the market players who have changed over the past decade.

I recall the 1999-2000 run as being much more enthusiastic and joyful. Individual investors couldn't get enough of the market, and there was excitement in the air as they bid stocks higher and higher. Stocks were discussed everywhere, and everyone seemed to be joining the party.

Probably the big difference back then was that the economic backdrop was very different. We weren't recovering from a major economic trauma back then like we are now. We were celebrating the monetization and economic viability of the Internet. It was a major economic shift in the way business was conducted, and market players were recognizing it as a new era. There is no similar innovation occurring now.

One similarity back then was that we also had the Fed running the printing press. There was great concern about the dangers of Y2K. There were many software programs in use that were likely to read the date '00 as 1900 instead of 2000. There were folks building cabins in the wilderness due to predictions of mass chaos. The Fed flooded us with cash as folks hoarded greenbacks just in case their ATM was a victim of Y2K.

Y2K turned out to be a bust, but all that cash was sloshing around out there, and much of it was put to work in the market. That is very similar to the quantitative-easing program we are seeing now, but back then, the Fed did a very poor job of removing that excess liquidity, which led to the subsequent market crash and housing bubble.

The biggest difference between the market back then and now is that the economic backdrop is so different. Many folks have suffered tremendous economic damage the last couple years, and even though the market has roared back, they have not seen their situation improve that much. That disconnect between Main Street and Wall Street is what has caused the lack of real excitement now vs. the bubble of 10 years ago.

Another factor to consider is that we aren't the same people we were 10 years ago. Since the top in 2000, we have had two major market pullbacks that were much more severe than anything we saw in the 1990s. We learned how quickly and easily we can lose money when the market turns. If you have been active in the market during the past decade, you are probably much more cautious now compared to 1999-2000.

Also during the bubble days, there were a tremendous number of new market participants jumping in every day as they watched their friends and neighbors make huge profits. In the current market, we still are missing many of the participants from a couple years ago, and it is very unlikely that there are a lot of new investors jumping in these days since there still is so little job security and real economic growth.

The key lesson we learned back in 2000 is that you can make some great money riding an extended market, but when the turn comes, it can become very ugly, very fast. We still have no signs of a top in this market, but there are many market players who are worried about it, which is probably one of the reasons we keep on going.

We have some slight weakness this morning. CPI was a bit better than expected, and weekly unemployment was roughly in line. Of course, any early weakness is usual a signal to buy, so a negative start is probably a good thing for the bulls.